I don't think they go far enough in medical beneficial operatives... In surprised that this is seen as too far. If anything it seems you think it's not far enough just too, not purely scientific based.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson

(04-06-2014 09:38 AM)ClydeLee Wrote: I don't think they go far enough in medical beneficial operatives... In surprised that this is seen as too far. If anything it seems you think it's not far enough just too, not purely scientific based.

It's not the fact that they are doing this that makes it too far, it's what exactly they are doing with it that bothers me. Why do van Gogh's ear? No need to go way over, just do the research. It's like if someone asked someone else to make a bird house and they made a bird mansion. If you want to do this research why do someone famous? Why not just get dna from some random person and do it?

"If you keep trying to better yourself that's enough for me. We don't decide which hand we are dealt in life, but we make the decision to play it or fold it" - Nishi Karano Kaze

(04-06-2014 09:38 AM)ClydeLee Wrote: I don't think they go far enough in medical beneficial operatives... In surprised that this is seen as too far. If anything it seems you think it's not far enough just too, not purely scientific based.

It's not the fact that they are doing this that makes it too far, it's what exactly they are doing with it that bothers me. Why do van Gogh's ear? No need to go way over, just do the research. It's like if someone asked someone else to make a bird house and they made a bird mansion. If you want to do this research why do someone famous? Why not just get dna from some random person and do it?

Why? To make money! Scientific research isn't well funded. To purpose of reaching out to pop culture is both to educate/interest others and generate funding.

Why should they focus on something that will make marginal gains but not help fuel them though?

And generally the phrase going to far is of a different context. Of doing things that could be harmful to the world. I don't see reaching out to the public as anything related to that.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson

(04-06-2014 09:38 AM)ClydeLee Wrote: I don't think they go far enough in medical beneficial operatives... In surprised that this is seen as too far. If anything it seems you think it's not far enough just too, not purely scientific based.

It's not the fact that they are doing this that makes it too far, it's what exactly they are doing with it that bothers me. Why do van Gogh's ear? No need to go way over, just do the research. It's like if someone asked someone else to make a bird house and they made a bird mansion. If you want to do this research why do someone famous? Why not just get dna from some random person and do it?

The research requires funding, many times in the form of grants.
They need to do something simple so, an ear is simple. Lets do an ear.
They need to get noticed for their work to help them get funding for future more complex work.
If they make an ear from someone who is famous for cutting off their ear (among other things) the more likely it will get noticed and, the better their chances of someone seeing the article about it and giving them money.
This has been repeated several times upthread, why don't you get it?

(04-06-2014 09:48 AM)JDog554 Wrote: It's not the fact that they are doing this that makes it too far, it's what exactly they are doing with it that bothers me. Why do van Gogh's ear? No need to go way over, just do the research. It's like if someone asked someone else to make a bird house and they made a bird mansion. If you want to do this research why do someone famous? Why not just get dna from some random person and do it?

The research requires funding, many times in the form of grants.
They need to do something simple so, an ear is simple. Lets do an ear.
They need to get noticed for their work to help them get funding for future more complex work.
If they make an ear from someone who is famous for cutting off their ear (among other things) the more likely it will get noticed and, the better their chances of someone seeing the article about it and giving them money.
This has been repeated several times upthread, why don't you get it?

I get it . But being able to create a living ear is big news of itself. They do not need to do someone famous to get peoples attention. Just publish papers of the results.

"If you keep trying to better yourself that's enough for me. We don't decide which hand we are dealt in life, but we make the decision to play it or fold it" - Nishi Karano Kaze

(04-06-2014 07:10 AM)JDog554 Wrote: Read this article today about how scientists used a 3D Printer and DNA from Vincent van Gogh's great great grandson to 3D bioprint his severed ear. Did we really need to do this? If so why? I'm all for discovering new things and doing the impossible but I feel sometimes we should focus more on what would benefit us instead of growing living ears for a dead painter.

Dude. It's not like 30% of the science world is focused on that. The great thing about being a scientist is that anyone can be one, without credentials. Also, since we're only in like, proto-gen bioprinting, it's a good idea to test our machines and see if that works. See, what did they figure out from this? They figured out they can regenerate body parts of dead men, which is pretty freakin helpful in my opinion.